S.A. schools fail federal standards

The number of Texas schools failing to meet federal accountability standards doubled this year — with Bexar County mirroring the abysmal rate, according to data released Wednesday by the Texas Education Agency.

The response from officials in Bexar County, where 13 of 16 districts failed to meet the federal standards, has been critical of an accountability system that the majority of states have opted out of and that Education Secretary Arne Duncan criticized Wednesday.

More than 4,000 Texas schools failed to meet “adequate yearly progress,” or AYP, standards. This is a tool used to assess school and district performance under the No Child Left Behind Act. Signed into law by then-President George W. Bush in 2002, NCLB became a point of political contention last year when President Barack Obama allowed states to waive the law's requirements in favor of local plans.

While 33 states and the District of Columbia have been approved for waivers, remaining states such as Texas continue to be held accountable to standards that in two years will require 100 percent of students to pass state math and reading/English language arts tests.

In Bexar County, the number of failing campuses has increased rapidly over the past few years. In 2010, 32 campuses failed to make the cut. The next year, the number quadrupled to 126, and this year it has nearly doubled as 243 campuses failed.

For the second year in a row, the state as a whole failed to meet AYP.

The requirements have increased dramatically every year. To meet AYP now, school districts had to have 87 percent or more of their students pass the state reading and English language arts test and 83 percent pass the state math test — a jump of 7 and 8 percentage points from last year.

Scores on the new State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness this year were converted into Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores so progress would be comparable.

“Certainly, we see the advantages of an accountability system,” TEA spokeswoman Suzanne Marchman said. But she added, AYP targets are so high there are no ways to distinguish between good and bad schools.

In San Antonio, even districts with strong state accountability scores failed to meet the high bar. While struggling school districts were once hardest hit by the federal accountability system, the rate of failure is now fanning out to all districts.

Results didn't come as a surprise to the area's two largest districts: the Northside and North East independent school districts. Unhappy with the AYP system, NEISD plans to research — for the first time — how to appeal some of the ratings, spokeswoman Aubrey Chancellor said.

The district failed to meet AYP for the second year in a row, this time because of reading and math tests and graduation rates.

“Accountability is certainly important but not at unrealistic standards,” Chancellor said. “These standards make no reasonable accommodation for students with disabilities, those from low-income households and those who struggle with the English language.”

Though educators have grown cynical of the AYP system, Northside, with almost 100,000 students, said it takes the results seriously and will examine each campus to see if improvements must be made.

At San Antonio ISD where Sam Houston High School continues to be at a Stage 5 sanction, the highest level, the school improved its graduation rate but continued to struggle with math and reading.

Only three Bexar County school districts — Lackland, Randolph Field and Schertz-Cibolo-Universal City — made AYP this year, results show.

“We're obviously very excited about the results,” said Superintendent Greg Gibson of Schertz-Cibolo-Universal, which bounced back after missing AYP for the first time last year.

He noted that 66 percent of Texas campuses failed this year and more could next year. At some point, he added, the standards are going to be unrealistic.

mcesar@express-news.net

Correction: Rhodes Middle School faces Stage 3 sanctions for failing to meet federal standards for yearly academic progress. A chart on Aug. 9's page A7 of the Express-News and on mySA.com incorrectly listed a more severe level of sanctions.

PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS THAT FAILED TO MEET FEDERAL STANDARDS

The area schools listed here failed tomeet at least one of the federal standards for adequate yearly progress, according to preliminary results.The school districts listed with Xs in the chart also fell short of one or more benchmarks.

The results

The number of local schools failing to meet federal academic standards of adequate yearly progress increased this year to 243, up from 126 last year.Thirteen of the 16 districts also failed.Passing standards were raised in math and reading this year.

What's next?

Schools that fail to meet AYP for the first time under the federal school accountability plan are given a warning. If they fail the standard for the same reason the following year, they move to Stage 1 of the federal School Improvement Plan and are subject to sanctions, which escalate every year a school remains on the list.

Only schools that receive Title I funds – set aside primarily for schools with a high percentage of students from low-income families – are subject to the sanctions.

The indicators

Schools and districts are graded in three areas:

READING: 87 percent of students and student subgroups (race, socioeconomic status, English-language proficiency and special needs) must pass this STAAR/TAKS subject and 95 percent of all students must take the test.

MATH: 83 percent of a school's students and subgroups must pass this STAAR/TAKS subject and 95 percent of all students must take the test.

GRADUATION RATE: A four-year graduation rate of 75 percent is the minimum. Schools and districts without grade 12 must have an average attendance of 90 percent.

School sanctions

STAGE 1: Officials must develop an improvement plan and notify parents of the failing status.District pays for transportation to another district campus if parents choose to transfer.

STAGE 2: Previous requirements apply, plus officials must offer and pay for added services, such as tutoring for low-income students.

STAGE 3: Previous requirements apply, plus officials must take corrective action, such as changing curriculum, replacing school staff, extending the school day or school year, or taking authority away from the principal.

STAGE 4: Previous requirements apply, plus the school must make a plan to restructure, such as: reopen as a charter school, replace school staff or turn over management of the school to a private company or the state.

STAGE 3: Previous requirements apply, plus officials must implement one of several corrective actions, including choosing a new curriculum, replacing personnel relevant to AYP failure, or transferring students to higher performing schools.